Skip to main content

Home/ Government Diigo/ Group items tagged go

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Amanda DuBois

Fleeing man leaves baby in Hastings field | Local News - KETV Home - 2 views

  •  
    Two females were babysitting a child, and they took the baby with them to go shoplift and ditched the baby in a field so they wouldn't get caught. One was arrested and there is a warrant out for the other arrest.
  • ...6 more comments...
  •  
    That is so not cool. You shouldn't shop lft in the first place but there is no telling what could have happened to the child. Talk about not thinking of the lives of others...
  •  
    Why would someone even want to shop lift something when they were babysitting they would other things to do and more responsibilities when your babysitting.
  •  
    That is absolutely terrible ! Who knows what would have happened to that child! How could anyone be so cruel to a child, just so they can shoplift !!
  •  
    Really proves you have to know the people you trust with your kid.
  •  
    Absolutely horrible. The amount of trust in the world is horrible right now.
  •  
    I wonder what kind of charges they are going to face or are they going to get a slap on the wrist and be told not to do it again like many people.... Hmmmm.
  •  
    That's ridiculous. I guess you really have to find out about babysitters. People are scary.
  •  
    ether way its bad but it could of been the best choice to do because who knows what could of happened if the kept the baby with them
Bryan Pregon

"I can't breathe!" N.Y. chokehold decision - CNN.com - 24 views

  •  
    Recent cases like these bring up issues of POWER and govt authority. Are these examples concerning? Which side (police/suspect) do you tend to sympathize with most?
  • ...14 more comments...
  •  
    I don't think it's concerning. The government is there for a reason, and they need power to do their jobs. I tend to sympathize with cops because it only shows the bad police that are in the system, a video of an officer doing something good rarely goes viral.
  •  
    I sympathize with the cop. He is here to protect us from people that can cause bad things, Michael Brown actually attacked him and the cop did what he had to do to survive. You have to show respect to cops and he didn't do only because he was black or that he wanted to kill someone, he did it becuase the felt threaten for his life
  •  
    I usually don't see death as an answer to anything unless that person is causing harm to other people. I don't think the officer should have actually killed him but instead used a different method to getting him to do what he wanted him to do.
  •  
    I think these examples are very concerning. I sympathize with the suspect, Eric Garner, after watching the short 2 minute clip of the incident. The suspect was unarmed, and was only verbally refusing arrest, there is no probable cause for putting the suspect in a choke hold, and very well killing him. The grand jury that decided that officer, Daniel Pantaleo, did the right thing started peaceful protest in the Garner family. This is like the case in Ferguson, Missouri, except these protest do not include, looting, setting businesses on fire, or tear gas.
  •  
    I think there could have been a better way to control the situation other than a choke hold. It would be understandable if it was for a few seconds to calm Garner down, but the police should have known when to stop. He should have been charged for excessive force.
  •  
    I strongly sympathize with Eric Garner and his family in this case. Police are stepping over the line in instances like these, and no penalties are given to them. The fact that death is necessary for the resistance of a single unarmed citizen is horrific. Resisting arrest or not resisting arrest, if there is no threat of fatal harm to the police officer, no arrest should ever resort to murder.
  •  
    I understand that the police thought they had to stop him, but putting him in a choke hold was not the right way. They are going to far with the power they think they have.
  •  
    i didn't see any reason why the officer put Eric Garner in a choke hold for what he did, the officer was abusing his power, a choke hold was not the right answer.
  •  
    They are going to far with the power they think they have, a choke hold was not right way to go
  •  
    yes especially the part when the officer put eric in the choke. the officer thinks he can do whatever he wants just cause hes a cop and had some power of us but he took it to far
  •  
    There were better methods of restraint to get Eric Garner into handcuffs. A choke hold was definitely not necessary, and the cop was definitely abusing his power. No attempted arrest should end in the death of someone, cop or citizen.
  •  
    The cop has a right to detain anyone that is breaking the law, but he should not have put him in a choke hold. He has numerous tools capable of detaining someone such as; handcuffs, pepper spray, and a taser.
  •  
    I don't believe that anyone should have any chances of death when being put in handcuffs, but I also don't know the full story of the incidents of the victims, maybe they weren't cooperating and the cops felt that the only way to control them was the chokehold. I believe that the cops should find another way to hold down their victims when handcuffing
  •  
    I think that this case is similar to the Ferguson case which could cause more people to start protesting more and even worse then they already are. Things could get really bad if it ever happened again.
  •  
    The cop has a right to detain anyone that is breaking the law, but he should not have put him in a choke hold. He has numerous tools he could of used while detaining someone like his taser, handcuffs, or pepper spray.
  •  
    The cop has no reason to put him in a choke hold and for so long. The guy was saying he couldn't breathe. This is very wrong and he could of detained him a few other ways.
Bryan Pregon

Special Report - Nebraska v. Colorado: The War on Weed - 22 views

  •  
    "Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson in western Nebraska as he built the state's lawsuit against Colorado. His ultimate goal is to shut down the pot industry. "To me, people are being sold a bill of goods from people who stand to make millions from this industry. Our culture is at a pretty critical time where a whole generation of youth are at risk and adults need to step up and say this is a real potential harm to fight against.""
  • ...11 more comments...
  •  
    I feel that if they try to close down the pot industry they will just be wasting their time. People will still be using marijuana even if its not legal or being grown.
  •  
    I think that if people try and shut down the pot industry, that it will be hard and it wont be easy. pot users and pot lovers will always use pot and will do all most anything to keep it legal.
  •  
    It surprises me that the traffic related fatalities in people who had marijuana in their systems has been raised so much. I didn't realize it was that big of a problem. Maybe adults do need to fight back more for this potential harm.
  •  
    I don't feel they should be fighting this war. This because they don't have a valid point saying that marijuana is harmful in all actuality peanuts kill more people annually than marijuana and actually there hasn't ever been a death directly caused by it. Further more alcohol and cigarettes are far more harmful and are still legal.
  •  
    I think Nebraska has every right to sue the state of Colorado because they can't contain it in their state. That or they need to change their law saying only people who have a Colorado ID can purchase it.
  •  
    I feel like legalizing Marijuana is a good idea in my opinion. It can be used to help man medical conditions and also is saving people's lives that really need it. It is used as a stimulate. If the government would legalize it they would make a profit by taxing the product. Therefore benefiting themselves. People are going to do what they want with marijuana, there would have to be certain restrictions on it though. I don't think Colorado will regret this law because it's not only helping them but their society.
  •  
    i feel like nebraska is just doing everything it can to get its way and not let the people have what they want. if nebraska would just make it legal, these problems would cease
  •  
    Although people are going to continue to use marijuana illegally, that doesn't mean we should stop trying to clean our states of it. Shutting down the pot industry may take awhile, but it's a good goal.
  •  
    I can see why Sheriff Adam Hayward of Deuel County, Nebraska, would want it shut down. It has a dispensary near their county, and makes it a little easier to bring marijuana into Nebraska. And may cost more for patrolling.
  •  
    I think no matter what you do marijuana will always be here. At least as long as it continues to grow people will continue to use it. I think Nebraska has a good point on how it is affecting costs for more paroling and road searches for people trying to sneak the drugs over, but the world is changing in so many ways and people just need to learn to adapt. I think Nebraska needs to find a way to adapt some how because it's their state thats having problems don't blame Colorado.
  •  
    This should not be tolerated, Colorado is Colorado and Nebraska is Nebraska. There's different laws.
  •  
    The only reason I am for the legalization of marijuana is because medical marijuana could help my mother. She has a severe nerve condition called trigeminal neuralgia. This is an inflammation if the main nerve in the face. There is research to suggest that medical marijuana could ease the suffering of people like her without all the health risks with what they use now as treatment. The current treatment is round the clock narcotics and this damages the liver. My mother already has liver damage so this could be a safer alternative.
  •  
    I think Nebraska could be taking it a bit to far with going to court about it be I also think Colorado could be doing more to prevent this.
guillermosolorio

Teen Charged With Murder In Deadly Crash - 21 views

If they have evidence that it was her than she should go to prison,it sounds liken they have no evidence though. they cant just assume it was her.

news

Bryan Pregon

Why Donald Trump Blinked on Guns | Time - 30 views

  •  
    What are your thoughts on the gun control debate. It will be 1 month tomorrow that Parkland FL school shooter killed 17 and seriously wounded 17 others. Has the outrage become "yesterdays news"? How do the POLITICS of this issue make solutions difficult to reach?
  • ...12 more comments...
  •  
    My thoughts on the debate is that guns should be more restricted, but not completely disallowed. Ideas like banning bump stocks are very good, but going without due process is a side that isn't good. However, the outrage and protesting about mass shootings like parkland and sandy hook should never become just yesterday news and should be a constant focus, but due to media jumping off issues quickly for ratings, how divisive the issue is among political groups, and the NRA lobbying extremely for gun rights, it is hard to reach any sort of conclusion and compromise,
  •  
    I do believe that our government did have intentions of wanting to change in order to prevent gun violence, but as time passed, they seem to have little effort now to do anything. Yes, the solution may take a long time for everyone to be on board with, especially to those that support guns, they are now neglecting the idea. From the government's perspective, it seems to be old news to them, but society and civilians are still trying to remind and encourage the White House to make a change.
  •  
    I think trumps thoughts on arming teacher is a good idea because it would keep schools safe and their students. It would also make the school shootings less likely to happen
  •  
    I believe that we should ban bump stocks, and raise the age to buy a gun with stricter background checks.
  •  
    I agree with Sara. It even said in the article that most of Trumps supporters republicans that don't want stricter gun laws. With that being said, he doesn't want to lose those supporters. It also talked about how he was for tightening the laws right after the shooting happened; moving into the idea without really knowing about gun laws. During the luncheon he hosted, he didn't stick to what he had proposed.
  •  
    I think sadly it has begun to become yesterdays news. At first everyone was outraged and everyone wanted results with plans of walkouts and things like that but as time passes people slowly started talking about it less and the press for change lessened.
  •  
    agreeing with sarah and dthomas how they had put their attention to it at first but after few days and weeks had passed they had lost the interest to put as much attention to it. They do need to put more attention and change the age to buy an assault rifle as it is as deadly as any other weapon, especially to an 18-year-old. The government risks more lives being taken with more school shootings by people who shouldn't have a weapon in the first place.
  •  
    This outrage has become slightly a thing of yesterday. I know it's not completely out of people's minds because there is still a lot of local and national talk about the walkouts and movements planned to continue the spread of awareness. In this article it states that Trump had changed his mind on the gun legislation a few weeks following the tragedy. He was all for changing the ages and putting restrictions on the gun laws, but was very quick to change his mind after the media died down on the subject. Most of his supporters, shown in private polls, are not interested in changing the gun laws and legislation because he still wants to hold as many supporters as he can. The outrage seems to be yesterday news because it isn't in the media all the much anymore. I don't think our country has moved on from the tragedy yet because there is still a lot of talk about the national walkouts and the other movements that are being pushed to enforce change in the legislation.
  •  
    I feel like as the president he should stick with his ideas and support them.Not switch up because hes afraid to upset people.The people voted him in he shouldn't cave because hes scared of the NRA when its our safety he should worry about
  •  
    I agree with Grace. She right it has become old news which is sad, people should talk more about the safety of people. And like Grace said they plan all these walkouts and stuff but people stopped talking about it which made the press quit talking about it, and if the press isn't talking about it then no one else is. And if no one is talking then there is going to be no change
  •  
    I think that this news has become "old". Huge amounts of support at first, but the momentum died eventually. The whole conversation is slowly dying because of the realities of politics too. Like one person said in the article, you can just swing a pen around for a bit and give way to legislation. It takes time. But sadly, this topic won't stay around long enough.
  •  
    When these shooting first happened the government had intentions of taking control of gun violence and preventing these type of events. But after a while their effort to control this has reduced to little or nothing. From the governments perspective they think that it will go away and but the community wants to have the laws change.
  •  
    I feel maybe they should be more strict on guns and the background checks be more thorough. just wondering why 21 for semiauto pistols but 18 for fully auto AR's. It should be the other way around.
  •  
    its yesterday news because after the shooting we been talking about to raise the age in assault rifle as in the last couple of weeks so this shooting gave a heads up about school safety and the age to buy assault rifles.
valtodd

Texas bomber dead: Man blows himself up in dramatic standoff with FBI and police - 16 views

  •  
    He ended up waiting until at least one person got close and blew himself up, the officer that was close got thrown back. They have stated that they are not sure if other people were helping him so they will keep looking. I personally think that he didn't want to go to jail for what he had done so he did a suicide bombing.
  • ...3 more comments...
  •  
    Are they sure they have all the bombs? They mentioned in the article that there could be more bombs out there planted before he died, and what are they doing to find those. Also, did they have any other suspects? I wonder if there were others helping him or people who knew about it. I feel like the reason for the last bombing and the fact that it was a suicide bombing played into the fact that he knew he was going to get caught and didn't want to be put in jail.
  •  
    I agree with Darby, how do we know that is all the bombs? I think he probably had people helping him with this. They can't even say why he did it they had an idea it might have been a racial thing but they don't know I also agree about him doing a suicide bombing because he didn't want to go to jail
  •  
    I don't know why this bomber placed bombs in boxes seams strange to me
  •  
    In the article they say that the bomber pre-setup bombs that explode when people get near them. But the article also said that they thought the bomber was targeting races such as hispanic and african american. I don't understand how the bomber could be targeting a specific race when the bombs were set up ahead of time. The article also mentions that there still might be bombs that he planted before he died, so how can he be targeting a specific race?
  •  
    They did mention that there could be more bombs but i doubt there is. I think if there are other bombs out there then maybe it was more then a one man job.
Bryan Pregon

A man's 'Do not resuscitate' tattoo left doctors debating whether to save his life - CNN - 38 views

  •  
    "He has no identification and no family with him. On his chest, he has a tattoo: "Do Not Resuscitate." What would you do?"
  • ...8 more comments...
  •  
    my opinion, i would have went off of what the tattoo said because i would have seen it as his wishes. he was pretty much gone when he arrived, plus there was no family with him. there was no one/nothing saying otherwise so i would have just let him go.
  •  
    I would be lost but I think I would still resuscitate him because tattoos can sometimes be a regret and they had no way of knowing if it was legit or not.
  •  
    I think it was a good call to wait until they had actual (documented) proof that he did not want to be resuscitated instead of just going off of the words on his body.
  •  
    i think it was good that he was saved
  •  
    Very tough situation!
  •  
    Personally, I find it very wise that the doctors would have guessed that he had been resuscitated in the past. Especially due to his old age and multiple problems. It was also wise of them to follow this mans wishes and let him go.
  •  
    I think they did the right thing by not resuscitating him because tattoo's can sometimes be jokes but, no one would joke about this sort of thing. In addition to that he was nearly dead when he got there so it may have been easier for him.
  •  
    I think it was a good choice to wait for documentation of him not wanting to be resuscitated.
  •  
    I agree with their choice not to resuscitate him, no one would joke about that and have it on their body permanently.
  •  
    I feel that this man is smart. It said that there was alcohol in his system so maybe he was a drunk so being drunk can cause you to misplace items so he took the action to get "Do Not Resuscitate" on his chest so when the doctors checked for his information they wouldn't find it so when they did open his shirt they would know not to resuscitate him
Bryan Pregon

This is why I can't custom-make cakes for same-sex weddings - 27 views

  •  
    "Jack Phillips is the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood, Colo. Oral arguments for Masterpiece Cakeshop v. CO Civil Rightswill be heard Tuesday. "
  • ...11 more comments...
  •  
    he was only defending his religion and his believe just like they were and he hoped they could've seen it it too
  •  
    Despite his religious beliefs no body should have the right to discriminate against customers based on race, religion, gender identity, sexual orientation, etc. If the situation were reversed I am positive he would be outraged that someone discriminated against him based on his religious beliefs. He is using the excuse of "standing up for his religious beliefs" to hide his hateful homophobia.
  •  
    I think gay people can get wedding cakes, they just wants to do usual wedding system.
  •  
    I think that as the owner of the bakery, he has the right to serve whoever he would like, it is ridiculous that some people would go as far as to sue someone for a stupid cake, grow up and get a life.Stop victimizing yourselves.
  •  
    I feel that the business owner can choose not give them the cake. A business has "the right to refuse service to anyone". Besides, its not like that business is the only place they can get their wedding cake.
  •  
    As the owner of the shop he should have the ability to refuse service to someone if their request goes against his beliefs, also the couple instead of just going to another place to get a cake and not causing all these problems decided to make it a big deal wasting time and money for both parties. Both parties involved are in the wrong
  •  
    Agreed Aaron
  •  
    I can see where both sides are coming from. But any business has the right to refuse to serve anyone they feel like. People may see it as wrong but any business can do this.
  •  
    Nobody should be discriminated against, but with our first amendment right says he legal does not have. "congress shall make no law respecting religion an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
  •  
    I wonder what is going to happen next.
  •  
    I agree that he does have the right to deny service to people and it seems he was very polite about, even if I don't personally agree with it I still think he shouldn't be sued. Although I do find it interesting how in this article the couple didn't have any quotes or anything.
  •  
    To clarify, this article published in USToday was an editorial written BY the baker in this case to give his side. Also a good video with both sides explaining their views https://goo.gl/73fXsW Although I didn't find an article written by the couple, here is another NYTimes story which has some of the legal issues explained from their side. https://goo.gl/sAacw4
  •  
    this is stupid it should not made who is getting married to who if they want a cake they should get one
lhunter952

Chicago Lawmaker Wants to ban Violent Video Games - 10 views

I see the viewpoint but I do not agree that video games make kids violent. If someone says a video game made them violent then there is obviously something else wrong with them if they see the fict...

Government news Bill

ataylor074

Derek Chauvin case: George Floyd honored in Minneapolisahead of trial - 17 views

  •  
    What do you guys think about this?
  • ...11 more comments...
  •  
    I think that they're doing an amazing job at peacefully trying to get justice for George Floyd, they mentioned a group called Mother's Love who were standing outside of the trial I think and were handing out flyers and offering emotional support.
  •  
    I'm glad that the trial is finally underway. I just wonder how they found unbiased members to make up a jury? You'd have to be living under a rock to have not heard about this case and formed some kind of opinion. While I do believe the officer is in the wrong, he still deserves the right to a fair trial, and I'm wondering how fair this trial will be since it's such a public matter and so personal to so many.
  •  
    I'm glad the trial is finally happening, I wonder if the person who shot George Floyd will be guilty
  •  
    I believe that George Floyd had an extremely unreasonable death and he didn't get his deserved rights. I also believe that a remembrance should be in order to remind us that we have protection against things like this.
  •  
    The continuous protest throughout the trial is something that is going to keep the light on this important issue. The trial is going to stay focused on and true justice will be served for George Floyd.
  •  
    I'm glad that they found the person that killed George Floyd guilty.
  •  
    I'm glad that they found the person that killed George Floyd and found guilty.
  •  
    It is good that he was convicted of all the crimes charged against him. I couldn't imagine the outcome being different.
  •  
    I'm glad that justice was served and that Derek Chauvin was convicted of all the crimes against him. Let's just hope that other people like George Floyd will get their justice too.
  •  
    I'm glad he was actually found guilty since there have been many times before where justice hasn't been served and they go free but this is good progress.
  •  
    It's good that he was found guilty, he 100% was guilty. George Floyd didn't have the greatest past but that was no reason enough for him to be murdered.
  •  
    I think it's good that he was finally found guilty. I'm glad that some justice was served in this case unlike many many others that deserve it.
  •  
    I think it's good that finally after a year Chauvin was finally found guilty, finally some justice.
Bryan Pregon

Biden's COVID stimulus bill passes Senate, legislation heads to House - 15 views

  •  
    "The Democratic-controlled Senate Saturday overcame Republican roadblocks and a debate that lasted beyond 24 hours to pass President Joe Biden's $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief package which would provide millions of Americans with $1,400 direct payments, billions of dollars for vaccine distribution, and funds to help reopen schools and colleges."
  • ...11 more comments...
  •  
    The stimulus bill sounds like a good deal for Americans. COVID-19 negatively impacted many people, so it's good that the government is trying to help get the country going after COVID-19.
  •  
    I think this stimulus bill is necessary and will be a step forward in the right direction. Although things seem to be slowly moving in the right direction there are still a lot of people without a job and in need of assistance so I think this will help those people out tremendously.
  •  
    This could go both way's as in good and bad. Good:So people can get some help from the government to help pay off debts or just put food on the table. Bad: some people can become to reliant on the government for money.
  •  
    this stimulus check is going to help a lot of families especially the ones who already struggle.
  •  
    I feel like the stimulus is a good thing for a lot of families that have been struggling throughout the pandemic. It is also bad in the way of tax inflation and things of that nature. Although I feel like it was needed for some, it might be damaging in the future.
  •  
    technically we could get 12,000 for a stimulus check but the government is not willing to do that.
  •  
    I feel like this is a relatively good amount for a stimulus check because the amount of inflation it will create will be far less than if the check was bigger.
  •  
    i think the check is a step in the right direction. it's giving families coverage and more cushion to their budget.
  •  
    I think this is a good check cause it will help people in the mere future and possibly in the present.
  •  
    So depending on who you are it could be a good thing or an iffy thing I believe that most people around our area would all agree that it's a good thing and I think so too.
  •  
    I think its good cause people could use this money during this time
  •  
    I think this is good because it gives people who lost money during covid a chance to buy some extra things for themselves or their families.
  •  
    I think the stimulus check was good for a lot of people that really did need it since they didn't have a job due to covid.
bigslide

House Republican introduces anti-trans legislation that could lead to genital exams for... - 36 views

  •  
    so it says "House Republican introduces anti-trans legislation that could lead to genital exams for school girls"
  • ...21 more comments...
  •  
    Im angry about this be because it's already been moving to pass in Mississippi, Connecticut, and Tennessee. It's sad to see so many people retaliate against the trans-community. They see us as disgusting monsters. They don't feel bad when they take away the rights of trans youth because of their lack of understanding of what being transgender actually is. I'm not speaking for all trans people, but I would have rather never been born than to be trans. for many reasons because most are too personal to say. and when old 1900s people take away our basic rights, and others seem to never care, it angers me.
  •  
    This is simply disgusting. Have people really become this ignorant and transphobic? Maybe they should... hear me out here... mind.their.business
  •  
    I personally agree that transgender women should be banned from women sports because biologically they are still male and for all of human history males have been proven to physically superior to females and when you put a transgender women whos been a male for most of their life vs a women whos been a woman all of her life it's gonna be pretty obvious whos gonna win I would hate to be a girl in a wrestling team and get destroyed by a transgender women whos been a male for the longest time ever.
  •  
    I disagree with the House of Republicans introducing anti-trans legislation that could lead to genital exams for females. America is a free nation where everyone has the right to choose and be identified based on their gender decision. As a female and one day future mother, I suggest not allowing this legislation because it will only spread narcissism and homophobia. Females should never be forced to go through an "examination" to prove their gender. The First Amendment guarantees our right to free expression and we should maintain it active no matter what.
  •  
    I disagree, I think people have a right to be who they want and have a right to participate in the things that they want. Just because you fear what you don't understand doesn't mean you can force HUMANS to go through these traumatizing experiences so you can tell them they can't do something. They have a right to play sports if they want to and people shouldn't stand in their way.
  •  
    I completely disagree with this. This is teaching young girls that it's okay for people to expect you to show them their genitals, this is teaching young girls that they don't have the choice to say no, this is teaching young girls to let old white men control our lives and the way that we handle our bodies. This is only adding to the rape culture of the present day by teaching girls that we don't have control over our bodies.
  •  
    I disagree with this whole thing. Females have privacy and should keep it. I don't even see the big deal in allowing someone who identifies as female to play a sport that is only for girls. People should be able to be who they identify as without facing discrimination. I thought we've moved on already.
  •  
    I disagree with the legislation. No one should have to have their genitals checked just to play sports in general. Also, people in the trans community already face enough humiliation and bullying, the old white men writing the legislation should stop worrying about what sports trans people play and instead work on attempting to end the global pandemic at hand.
  •  
    how do you not see the problem with trans people playing sports? Men are scientifically stronger than females creating an unfair advantage. These trans people will just take opportunities away from women, like scholarships. If you are say a female wrestler, would you want to wrestle a male? No, because it's unfair.
  •  
    I disagree with this completely. We should not have to show our genitals or get them checked in order to play sports. The trans community gets so much hate and suffers enough as it is. The people writing the legislation need to quit being so concerned with the trans community and what sports they're playing and also quit trying to pass laws that could invade young womens privacy. It's disgusting that this is even being considered.
  •  
    Personally I think people should be allowed to do what they want, transgenders playing sports included. Politicians spend too much time creating conflict and fighting among themselves, which creates division among the people too
  •  
    I also feel like most don't really care about the highschool sport. They just don't want trans people participating. I think when they imagine a trans woman, they think of a pedo looking dude, or very masculine. When in reality, many trans women look very much like women. I understand a physical sport, like wrestling, but that's basically it. Maybe weight lifting, but everything else is just based on the fact that some people don't understand the transgender mind and body and how they work. Who cares about high school or middle school volleyball that much to be so concerned to want to check any women's genitals? invasion of privacy and just embarrassing.
  •  
    I 100% disagree with this. First off girls shouldn't have to show their genitals in order to play sports, it's an invasion of privacy and just disgusting. And secondly, this legislation perpetuates the idea that trans women aren't women, which simply isn't true. If a trans woman, or just a trans person in general, wants to play a sport on the team that aligns with their gender identity they should be able to.
  •  
    I completely disagree with the statement "I also feel like most don't really care about the highschool sport". These high school athletes put in many hours of their week into participating in their sport. These people care a lot. For some kids, this could be their only way out of a bad situation they are in. Also, it's not only wrestling that this would create an unfair advantage. Basketball, Soccer, Softball, Volleyball, Swiming. The list just goes on. If you say that "Most people don't care" you must not be involved in any type of sport seriously.
  •  
    true, I don't participate in sports. I guess I didn't think about how big and important even middle school sports can be, and I'm sorry bout that. What I was trying to say before is that most of the people passing these laws don't care about the sport. They just don't. They see Biden allow trans people back into the military, and they got mad. Another thing is that for the people saying it's a disadvantage, idk what to say to ya'll. Yall All could ban mentally disabled girls because it could "bring the team down". yall could ban stronger girls with muscle because they are "too strong compared to the other girls and its unfair". Anyone can make excuses to discriminate against a group they don't understand or care about and make it sound like they have the best of intentions. And maybe they do, but the fact they think they can stop the freedom of that individual because its unfair to them, shows the lack of understanding they have on that issue. I'm a trans person, and I personally live through small micro-aggressions and just blatant transphobia in my own house every day. So when I see discrimination with no consiterate thought on how to solve an issue (instead of finding a solution, they just ban people from playing all together) that's when I have an issue. I'm sorry this is long btw (:
  •  
    the fact that they could say "I also feel like most don't really care about their highschool sport" is wrong the people who participate in their high school sports aren't just doing it for fun that may be one of the only ways they can start a career they want or it may be their only way to get out of a bad situation they also take hours out of their weeks to perfect their skills I personally think most people just don't understand the time & dedication.
  •  
    I don't think that it should truly matter as long as they are doing what they need. The girls who are putting time and dedication into the sport should get to play, that is all that matters.
  •  
    I agree with the ban because I feel it would always result in an unfair advantage however if there are ways to make it fairer then I suppose I would have no real problem with it
  •  
    I disagree with this because it could allow children to think that other people looking at their genitals and that's just disgusting. Also, I feel like someone who is transgender is going to be taking certain hormones to change their body and while they are transitioning they shouldn't have the possibility of being looked at in this way because trans people already struggle with body dysphoria and this may just worsen it.
  •  
    I feel like if you were born a male then it is fair to switch to a female or do whatever makes you happy but, it is definitely unfair for someone with the genetic make-up of a man to be competing against women in sports. Man are known to generally be stronger and more athletic than women and I feel like if they were competing in a physical activity it would never be fair.
  •  
    This is a disgusting bill that has begun passing in some conservative states. The people writing these don't understand that Transgender (Male to Female) start hormone therapy that degrades their muscle building and strength overall so people would not have that much of an advantage. Also, no one is upset if it was a Transgender female to male.
  •  
    Whether you think transgender athletes should be able to participate in sports or not I think this bills is unacceptable and unethical because it allows for a challenge where an examination of the students genitals is required. In high school sports a place known a lot of times for coaches sexually assaulting young athletes and taking advantage of them I don't think under any circumstance a proposition like this should be acceptable.
  •  
    I do believe that this bill violates citizens' rights and is unethical. People should be allowed to be trans and should be allowed to identify as one. However, when it comes to sports they still should be separated because even if I was a woman it is still conflicting with nature. If the woman/woman is ok with the competition then it's fine to me.
Michael Keller

Biden seeks to close any path for Trump win in race's final days | AllSides - 4 views

  •  
    Biden might actually win, It appears the odds are stacked against Trump
  • ...5 more comments...
  •  
    It looks as though it's going to be a close race between the two. Biden is in the lead by a few so he might just win by a hair.
  •  
    It was pretty close at first but Biden is definitely going to pull through and win.
  •  
    There is no way Trump is going to win, Biden is definitely winning.
  •  
    It's pretty crazy how the red states flipped I was definitely more interested in the presidential election than the last one.
  •  
    I was not expecting some of the states that were red to flip to blue as they did, I was more into seeing who was winning in this election because of how close the race was.
  •  
    I wasn't expecting so many red states to flip. I see why Trump says it's rigged, however, can he find proof?
  •  
    there was a lot of events that I didn't expect nor intend on happening, I believe that both parties at this time are just in it to win it
Bryan Pregon

McConnell Votes To Dismiss Trump Impeachment Trial As Only Five Senate Republicans Side... - 10 views

  •  
    This process took too long to complete before Trump left office. Now some feel that finishing the Senate trial is a waste of time. What do you think?
  • ...6 more comments...
  •  
    McConnell is an utter ghoul. Trump, even in the long tradition of criminal presidents, is in a whole 'nother league, and absolutely should be tried for his many, many crimes. The idea that just because he's out of office shouldn't be a factor. That would be like saying a hitman shouldn't be tried for murder just because they quit.
  •  
    impeaching trump is only going to hurt the Biden admin, the first 100 days are they most important but now with the senate trial people are going to be more focused on that then the thing Biden is doing
  •  
    If you label Trump as a criminal then you would have to label every other politician as one as well. The fact that he's not in office not only makes him a civilian but trying him at the federal level, just to block him from running again in 2024 is pointless and a waste of congressional time. As well as the American government needs to put the focus on other things than an ex-politician, let's start worrying about getting money to the American people and getting vaccines out.
  •  
    If the Senate does not vote to impeach Donald Trump it will prove that a President has the power to do whatever he wants as long as his/her party is in the majority. Also, I know that if President Biden was to do the same thing and literally incite a riot on the Capitol then house republicans and republican voters would be calling for impeachment. No matter what party you are, doing what Former President Trump did is disgusting and justice has to be served.
  •  
    Just like the last impeachment, this one is a waste of time. We need to focus on the US and not Impeaching Trump. Given the current situation, we do not have the time to impeach Trump. If we impeach him it's going to be another 3 months of wasted time just like the last impeachment.
  •  
    I feel like people tend to judge Trump on how he acts rather than what he has done. Yeah he acts childish but if he's done good things why cant he be credited for it.
  •  
    I think they should not try impeaching again because now that Trump is out of office they don't have to worry about whatever he does. America has several other huge problems and needs to focus all of its attention on getting life back to normal before worrying about a man that's not in any federal position.
  •  
    Commenting of what ndvorak said here. I do, in fact, believe most politicians are criminals. Every politician that has not tried to use their powers to quell deaths during Covid, or tried to stop our shipments of weapons to Saudi Arabia, or tried to stop our use of drone warfare, they have blood on their hands.
Bryan Pregon

Chicago teachers are going on strike today, leaving 360,000 kids in limbo - CNN - 1 views

  •  
    "About 360,000 students have no idea when they'll see their teachers again as members of the Chicago Teachers Union go on strike Thursday."
jsachs097

Education and Child Policy | Cato Institute - 2 views

  •  
    I think there are some things the school or parents have the right to do. The parents have the right to send them to whatever school they and their child choose. The school has the right to restrict the child from doing certain things that could result in a code of conduct brake. According to the government, they say a child must attend school until they are 18 and are considered an adult. I believe that is all the government should be allowed to do. It's then up to the student to continued their education or go into the workforce.
  •  
    I think that the government's power should be to help people get an education, but it's up to the parents and students to decide where to go and if they want to go on for more schooling. For some jobs, college might not help as much as a trade school, and that's a decision for the parents and student to decide.
jessicasolorio

Joe Biden and climate change: 10 executive actions President-elect Biden is planning - Vox - 5 views

  •  
    Thankful Biden is aware of the danger we put our environment in and I think it's a smart way to spend government money and use his power.
  • ...2 more comments...
  •  
    i am so glad biden is looking into and wanting to clean energy, carbon neutrality by the middle of the century, and massive federal investment to drive these changes. i think that is great and we need change is this environment
  •  
    I think that it is a good thing Biden is going to rejoin the Paris climate agreement again. It will only help this country become cleaner.
  •  
    I'm happy that Biden is going to be looking more into climate change and implementing more things to help keep our planet healthy.
  •  
    I'm also happy Biden is going to focus on the environment more. I just hope he can stay alive long enough to do so.
mavalos442

Is Trump's illness a coronavirus wake up call for Americans? | AllSides - 9 views

  •  
    Trump did not take this virus seriously, he wasn't strict over safety precautions. Now that he has it he expects people to stand with him.
  • ...5 more comments...
  •  
    I think that Trump is going to be okay and the election should go as planned
  •  
    I think the election would be very difficult without the candidates not feeling well, but I think Trump will be fine.
  •  
    I think the election should still go on as planned maybe some more safety precautions. I think Trump will be fine.
  •  
    Donald Trump didn't take the virus seriously, got sick, and is now back to healthy. This isn't a wakeup call because he recovered fast and never appeared to be in bad shape.
  •  
    He never appeared to be in bad shape which led many to believe it was a hoax or that hospitals are hiding something. He did not take it seriously and Americans will not take it seriously either if he doesn't step up first.
  •  
    Trump never seemed to be in any bad shape and because of this, it is not really a wake-up call. He was not strict on safety precautions and did not wear a mask all the time.
  •  
    Trump should have been more serious about the virus and should have taken some more precaution. he could have been better about wearing a mask and his safety more too.
Bryan Pregon

Amanda Gorman's inauguration poem, 'The Hill We Climb' - The Washington Post - 17 views

  •  
    This was the best speech from the inauguration 2021. Now she's hinting at a run for President. 2036 is right around the corner ?!?
  • ...8 more comments...
  •  
    The speech was well thought out and very well written. I think it's interesting how inspiring she's been to people due to the speech.
  •  
    I think her speech was amazing. I never really listen to those kinds of things or pay attention, but I'm glad I did. However, I'm not sure going from giving a speech, to being president is very realistic. More power to her though for thinking ahead like 15 years.
  •  
    I was lucky enough to be able to watch the inauguration in my classes. I was enthralled by Amanda Gorman's speech. I feel like her words were well said and represented Americans of all ages and backgrounds. I believe that her speech has influenced younger generations to have a voice. While she has quite a ways to go, I do believe that she could be president someday.
  •  
    I think her speech can reach all different people of different race, gender, etc. I think she can talk to different generations, especially the younger ones who one day will be the voices of our society. I think it was well thought out and a very good speech.
  •  
    I thought her speech was amazing. I like how she worked to make sure it could reach all kinds of people. I also thought it was really inspiring reading about her speech impediment and how she didn't let it prevent her from writing and performing her poems.
  •  
    Amanda's poem was amazing. Her words were so inspirational. I think Americans needed to hear something about hope, especially after last year's crazy events. And I'm sure that if she was able to overcome her speech impediment to speak in front of so many people, she can do anything she sets her mind to, even becoming a future president. I can't wait to see what other things she achieves!
  •  
    I think that she had a really good speech. I liked the way she would word things and reached all different kinds of people. It was a very inspirational speech and i feel like she has a good future in front of her.
  •  
    I understand how unique this poem is and how well it is said and written, but honestly after listening and understand each individual sentence and word ( including definitions of words ) it just sounds like what other people have been saying for the past 365 days without the high-level words. She talks about how much America is broken after everything that happened in 2020, how many steps we need to take so everything is not back to the way it was before, but where we want it to be and where we want it to go. Congrats to her by all means, but hearing the same things being said over and over again just makes her poem less impactful. Of course, these problems need solving but most people just the problem not how to fix them.
  •  
    Her speech was very inspirational. The way she read it was really good
  •  
    I could hardly tell that Amanda had a speech impediment! She delivered her speech so well
Bryan Pregon

Fact check: 1964 law does not create religious exemption from masks - 17 views

  •  
    People shouldn't be using religion as an excuse not to wear a mask unless they prove that their religion does, in fact, say no masks.
  • ...18 more comments...
  •  
    I think it should be up to yourself to decide whether or not you want to wear a mask.
  •  
    Though I respect the foundation and practice of religion I don't think that it should be used to put lives as risk by not wearing your mask in public and potentially exposing tons of people to the virus.
  •  
    I think religion could be a factor, but they shouldn't use it when it comes to risking other people's health in public and exposing others and yourself; If they are going off of religion itself and not having anything to prove that masks are against their religion. It is important to be respectful and polite to others in public by wearing a mask.
  •  
    i think everybody should wear mask.
  •  
    I think that everyone should have to wear a mask not just to protect yourself but other people as well. Religion should not be a factor in wearing a mask and keeping people safe in the long run. Not wearing a mask is selfish and could harm other people when around other people it should be a polite common courtesy.
  •  
    I think everyone should wear a mask. You could spread covid and harm others because of your decision not to wear one.
  •  
    I think it should be up to you if you want to wear a mask or not.
  •  
    Wearing a mask should be an option, no one is forced, but people should consider other's health.
  •  
    I agree with oli; people should not be using religion as an excuse to not wear a mask unless they can prove their religion does not allow masks. That is disrespectful and selfish to use religion as an excuse if you cannot prove your religion does not allow it. Honestly, everybody should wear a mask it's not that hard, we're all going through the pandemic together just because you think it's too uncomfortable shows your unwillingness to consider others well beings.
  •  
    Everyone should wear a mask, not only to protect themselves but others too. Not wearing a mask is incredibly selfish. Unless they can actually prove it is against their Religion to wear a mask, then they should be wearing one.
  •  
    everybody should wear a mask. if you wear mask, it's law risk to get corona.
  •  
    I think people shouldn't use religion to get out of wearing a mask. The mask itself is not to protect yourself, it's to protect the ones nearby. It's just common courtesy.
  •  
    Protecting your religious rights is important but you have to be considerate of everyone else as well especially in a time of panic global issue.
  •  
    I believe wearing masks should be one's choice if they want to or not because at the end of the day it's their body their choice and if you say people should have to wear one in the safety of others than many other laws should be revoked like the Rowe vs wade because abortion is killing another human being bc its an inconvenience to the mother so someone should not have to wear a mask because its an inconvenience to them
  •  
    I think that If we all are required to wear masks, then even if you are religious, you should too. You shouldn't use your religious views as an excuse to not wear it. We are all required, so we all are going to. I understand where you should be able to choose on if you want to wear one or not, and I'm all for that, but until they say it's your choice, then you should be following the rules and wearing a mask, for the safety of the people that could get really sick from catching the virus.
  •  
    I think religion should not be a reason to not wear a mask. How do religion and a mask relate?
  •  
    I think the fact that masks are required for our health shouldn't be an issue with a religion they are both used for a different reasons which both are important.
  •  
    I think it should be up to yourself to decide whether or not you want to wear a mask.
  •  
    Wearing masks not only helps you but others around you. It shouldn't be up to your religion to keep others safe. This is a world wide pandemic, why is wearing a mask that big of a deal. Including when it comes to the conversation of religion.
  •  
    I think people should just wear masks for the safety of them and others, I get it sucks, but it would suck more if someone was dying because you didn't wear your mask, or even worse if you were dying because you didn't wear it.
« First ‹ Previous 81 - 100 of 424 Next › Last »
Showing 20 items per page